ISSN 1003-8035 CN 11-2852/P

    基于顺层边坡破坏机理的工程防治方案以贵州毕龙高速顺层边坡为例

    Engineering prevention and ontrol cheme based on failure mechanism of bedding slopes: A case study of bedding slopes on the Bilong expressway in Guizhou Province

    • 摘要: 我国西南山区地质构造复杂,同一段边坡岩性及岩层产状常存在明显差异。为研究软质岩顺层边坡和硬质岩顺层边坡在不同层面倾角条件下的稳定性及破坏模式差异,以贵州毕龙高速ZK21+120~ZK21+770左侧顺层边坡为例,在工程测量、地质调绘、钻探、试验基础上,对粉砂质泥岩和灰岩顺层边坡运用Phase2软件进行数值计算对比研究。结果表明:顺层边坡层面倾角为35°左右时稳定性最差,变形量最大;不同层面倾角边坡破坏模式不同,粉砂质泥岩顺层边坡有滑移-拉裂、层面滑移、滑移-弯曲、挤压-弯曲4种破坏模式,灰岩顺层边坡有滑移-拉裂、层面滑移、挤压-弯曲3种破坏模式;软质岩顺层边坡和硬质岩顺层边坡稳定性及变形破坏模式存在差异,工程防护也应有所侧重。因此,对于顺层边坡,层面倾角大致以50°为界,缓倾角以坡脚支挡为主、坡面锚固为辅,陡倾角以坡面锚固为主、坡脚支挡为辅。

       

      Abstract: The mountainous region of southwestern China is characterized by complex geological structures, where significant variations in lithology and stratum attitudes within the same slope section are frequently encountered. This study aims to investigate the differences in stability and failure mechanisms between soft-rock and hard-rock bedding slopes under varying bedding dip angles, thereby enabling the development of targeted engineering protection measures. Taking the left-side bedding slope along the ZK21+120~ZK21+770 section of the Bilong expressway in Guizhou Province as an example, the research conducted a comparative numerical analysis using Phase2 software. The modeling incorporated data from engineering surveys, geological mapping, borehole drilling, and laboratory testing for both silty mudstone (representing soft rock) and limestone (representing hard rock). The results indicate that slope stability is poorest and deformation is greatest when the bedding dip angle is around 35°. Failure modes vary with dip angle: silty mudstone slopes exhibit four distinct failure modes: sliding-tension cracking, bedding-plane sliding, sliding-bending, and compression-bending; whereas limestone slopes display three failure modes: sliding-tension cracking, bedding-plane sliding, and compression-bending. Significant differences exists between soft-rock and hard-rock bedding slopes in terms of stability and deformation–failure characteristics, leading to different engineering protection priorities. Therefore, for bedding slopes, a bedding dip angle of approximately 50° serves as a critical threshold. For gently dipping slopes (<50°), toe support should be the primary measure, supplemented by surface anchoring. For steeply dipping slopes (>50°), surface anchoring should be prioritized, with toe support playing a secondary role.

       

    /

    返回文章
    返回